Vista retail not sellling - surprisingly..

superscaper

turbobob wrote: »

How long ago are you talking though?

Within the last year, and the main one I tried was Ubuntu (so in fact I was mainly thinking of that when I was posting, Feisty Fawn I think at first and Gutsy Gibbon hadn't made any improvements that would solve the problems I had) but messing about with trying to get working drivers was a nightmare. If this was many years ago I wouldn't have been stupid enough to presume nothing had changed since and comment on it. If there aren't the drivers etc and I can't get it working with the very basic hardware then really what's the point? Great that it worked for you but it's obviously got a long long way to go if you can't get it working with big manufacturers' hardware (netgear, 3com, creative, HP....). It kind of defeats the point for me if you have to buy new hardware in order to get it working properly on just the base unit of a pc. And the fact you had no problem means you've not experienced the complete pain it is to try and get something working in Linux, hardly user friendly for that. I first tried linux many years ago and it's definitely come a long way in terms of UI and installation but it's not really very accessible when things go wrong and it still doesn't have nearly enough manufacturer support to make it as useful as Windows. That's not Linux's fault but as the end user do I really care whose fault it is, all I want is a working OS.

JustPassingBy

superscaper wrote: »

Every single piece of hardware and peripheral I have at the moment (in use and spare) works with my installed XP. Yet I've tried numerous linux distros and not been able to get a single one of them to work with just the minimum hardware I wanted them to. The reason I gave up on them was because it was such a pain to mess about with and taking up far too much of my time (which just ended up in dead ends anyway with hardware) when things go wrong, at least it's relatively easy to fix something going wrong in XP. What it could do in its limited form was nice and neat but I saw no glaring advantage over Windows other than I could install it on as many machines as I wanted but that's a bit moot if it doesn't do what you want.

The majority of people never attempt to install another OS. They are happy their existing one works on the machine and peripherals they bought. Choosing to do otherwise means stepping into territory which is unknown so there is preparation to be done. Selecting a distribution to install and researching whether it supports the hardware available seems a logical first step.

IDE drive X is not supported at all (highly unlikely)? Drivers for video card Y won't play the latest games without a proprietary binary but will run the X server (very likely). Not all the functions on printer Z can be used (possible)? And so on.

A decision can now be made based on your needs, your enthusiasm, the state of your bank account, time constraints etc, etc. Neglecting any preparation but just Inserting a CD, booting and standing back with your fingers crossed may or may not end in triumph. When an install on unsupported hardware fails it is not the fault of the OS.

In cases where supported hardware doesn't function as expected my experience is that it almost always due to my not reading the documentation thoroughly enough and/or not configuring the device correctly.

Brian.

superscaper

JustPassingBy wrote: »

In cases where supported hardware doesn't function as expected my experience is that it almost always due to my not reading the documentation thoroughly enough and/or not configuring the device correctly.

Brian.

I think most posters here who've seen my posts will judge for themselves my own level of competance. Believe me it just simply didn't work, it wasn't down to any mistakes on my part and I tried all the various ndswrappers workarounds and chipset drivers etc possible. I spent an awful lot of time and effort well beyond simply putting in a CD. Nobody could have been more frustrated that it didn't work, as I really wanted it to but there's just not the support there. As I've already said (I think you missed that bit and also the bit that I said I first started using linux years ago, hardly only just stepping into unknown territory) it doesn't matter to me whether that's the fault of the OS or the hardware manufacturers, the end result is the same, an OS that doesn't do what I need it to do (in my case just the very simplest of networking either by ethernet or wifi, or working with a particular printer). The whole point of me recently attempting to use linux on certain PCs was to make use of that hardware without extra copies of windows, it'd defeat the purpose to have to spend money on replacing all the hardware in order to use linux, that's the tail wagging the dog.

JustPassingBy

superscaper wrote: »

If there aren't the drivers etc and I can't get it working with the very basic hardware then really what's the point? Great that it worked for you but it's obviously got a long long way to go if you can't get it working with big manufacturers' hardware (netgear, 3com, creative, HP....).

Your question is probably rhetorical but if there are no drivers for a piece of essential hardware there is no point in installing the OS. If it is predicted not to work it won't. Do you recollect the details of the hardware which was deficient in this respect?

Brian.

superscaper

JustPassingBy wrote: »

Your question is probably rhetorical but if there are no drivers for a piece of essential hardware there is no point in installing the OS. If it is predicted not to work it won't. Do you recollect the details of the hardware which was deficient in this respect?

Brian.

Well first thing was a wireless Netgear WG111v1, that's the whole point of the wrapper to use the existing windows drivers, there was no obvious "prediction not to work". Next thing was a 3com ethernet card, that didn't work either.

superscaper

I've already been over all of the problems on the Ubuntu and other linux forums, there aren't any solutions that I've found to work and the only suggestions in the end have been to use different hardware which as I've explained defeats the point. The last pc I used, after weeks and months of messing about I just installed a spare windows 98 and everything worked fine.

wolfman

What version of Ubuntu did you try? The WG111 is supported out of the box now (no need for ndiswrapper), or at least v2 is. Not sure about v1.

superscaper

wolfman wrote: »

What version of Ubuntu did you try? The WG111 is supported out of the box now (no need for ndiswrapper), or at least v2 is. Not sure about v1.

I'm not sure if I tried gutsy gibbon but I'd definitely tried feisty fawn. I gave that pc away now anyway. I'm not giving up on linux altogether but just for the moment I don't want to start treating my aging main pc as a sandbox.

I did get it working for a while but it seemed to completely freeze after a few seconds of downloading and required complete reboot and reactivating the wifi chipset each time. Highly frustrating, I couldn't even download the update packages.

JustPassingBy

superscaper wrote: »

I think most posters here who've seen my posts will judge for themselves my own level of competance. Believe me it just simply didn't work, it wasn't down to any mistakes on my part and I tried all the various ndswrappers workarounds and chipset drivers etc possible. I spent an awful lot of time and effort well beyond simply putting in a CD. Nobody could have been more frustrated that it didn't work, as I really wanted it to but there's just not the support there.

My comments were intended as general ones on how to approach the installation of a new OS to give the best chance of success. I can understand your frustration in the aftermath, but when manufacturers withhold specifications for hardware it does make it difficult to provide the necessary level of support. Personally I'd avoid anything which needed ndiswrapper but on the whole I think its developers are doing pretty well

As I've already said (I think you missed that bit and also the bit that I said I first started using linux years ago, hardly only just stepping into unknown territory) ...

No, I didn't miss that.

...... it doesn't matter to me whether that's the fault of the OS or the hardware manufacturers, the end result is the same, an OS that doesn't do what I need it to do (in my case just the very simplest of networking either by ethernet or wifi, or working with a particular printer). The whole point of me recently attempting to use linux on certain PCs was to make use of that hardware without extra copies of windows, it'd defeat the purpose to have to spend money on replacing all the hardware in order to use linux, that's the tail wagging the dog.

The OS will do what you want it to - but not very easily with some of the equipment you have. Annoying, but easily rectified if its important enough. If its not you move on.

Brian.

superscaper

JustPassingBy wrote: »

The OS will do what you want it to - but not very easily with some of the equipment you have. Annoying, but easily rectified if its important enough. If its not you move on.

Brian.

Have done. Hence the "given the pc away". It would only ever be an ancillary system anyway because very little of the software I need (or want) is available on Linux and in addition I'm pretty pleased with Office 2007 ultimate which I think would be a very difficult thing to find all the analogous software for on Linux. Open office is good but not that good.